I tried that with the original i7 iMac and ended up buying another PC tower 6 months later. I found that trying to turn an iMac in to a gaming machine just got me a noisy Mac and mediocre gaming performance. Separate boxes is the go.

Not really for me. I'm no longer a high-end gamer, but I can run some pretty sweet stuff on my '08 Mac Pro like Dragon Age Origins. I went the single quad core route with the 8800 GT video option and upped it to 6GB of RAM. I have a single box that almost 2.5 years later runs fantastic. I haven't run anything on it yet that I've needed to turn down setting on to get smooth video performance.

Someday soon I'll update the Windows partition to Win 7. My XP partition current runs like the 2.5 year old Windows install that it is. I've never had much luck with Windows performing well for much more than 6 months or so before needing a clean wipe and re-install. I'm sure if I install Win 7 and throw whatever the latest graphics crushing title is at it I'll see some performance issues, but short of that I think I'm in pretty good shape.

As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.

I keep seeing this kind of argument and it never quite makes sense to me. The Mac product line continues to outsell itself quarter by quarter, so why wouldn't this continue to be a focus for Apple? I'm going out on a limb here, but I would guess that Apple has different development teams for Mac, iPad, iPod, etc. In fact, I would even guess that there is further differentiation at Apple in that there are most likely specific design teams for the MacBook, one for the iMac, another for the Mac Pro, etc.

The Mac product line seems to be a cash cow for Apple. Why would Apple ever as a company decide to simply neglect this revenue stream? Are they simply starstruck with their own ingenuity over the iPad and iPhone? Do they really believe that the desktop computer is going the way of the dodo? Even if this were true, doesn't it make more sense for them to ride this cash cow all the way into the sunset rather than abandoning it before it's time? Especially with ever increasing sales?

My guess is that once you start seeing USB 3.0 devices at BestBuy and WalMart you'll also see it in Macs. In fact, I'm pretty confident that you'll see it in Macs well before you can go into BestBuy and have anything other than one or two out of stock USB 3.0 drives. It's nice to have all the latest bells and whistles, but there is a point at which it simply doesn't make sense to throw in the bleeding edge just to say it's there.

No one says they're completely ignoring it, nor are they abandoning it. The fact is that the iPhone is a halo product which gathers most of the press and public hype. The Mac does not.

Apple once pushed technology in its Mac lineup. Now because there isn't a plethora of USB 3.0 devices is a reason not to equip them with it? There are plenty of devices already out there, and most motherboard manufacturers have already included the technology quite some time ago on their products. Laptops are slowly becoming more available with USB 3.0 as well.

USB and PCI gained a foothold in the computer industry because the Mac lineup switched to those technologies way back when. Let's not forget other technologies like 64 bit OS, SSD... The Mac, as the high-end platform it is, has traditionally been rather avant garde in respect to technology. Now, it seems like it just flounders as of lately.

I have no doubt that they have dedicated core development teams for each product, but I'm sure they also move around quite a bit of resources for development of different products. I seriously doubt that everyone that works on the iPhone and Mac works solely on the iPhone and Mac, respectively.

And what, exactly, are you going to connect to eSATA? Is it faster than FW800? Sure. But other than a fast RAID, which is still fairly uncommon for consumers to own, what peripheral are you going to connect that will take advantage of eSATA's speed? You might get a slight benefit if you have a very fast single external drive, but not enough to justify adding that new port.

I asked for Firewire 1600, 3200 and USB 3.0 not eSATA. And of course having a faster connection helps backing up huge data, which is my problem.

I guess I'm surprised this didn't come with an HDMI out in addition to the mini-DP video/audio output.

Since that's the case I wish Apple would, once and for all, sell a mini-DP -> HDMI cable (not an adapter or dongle) that supports audio.

No matter, there is definitely a quad-core 27" iMac in my immediate future.

Monoprice sells some cables that are MiniDP to HDMI, but they don't support audio. Does anyone sell those cables?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoolook

The 5670 is a little better (at least it's current gen) but it's still from the bargain bucket. Even the Mac Pro only has a 5770, which would lose in almost any (DX10/DX9) benchmark against my 2 year old 4890.

Actually the 5670 is equal to the 4890, plus it's a DX11 part. I do agree that gaming should be more important to them with Steam on the platform now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ascii

I am wondering if the i3 and i5 chips have integrated graphics that is being ignored by the OS, or if they are somehow variants without an IGP.

They are the desktop versions. Only the mobile iX series has IGPs built in.

As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.

Any opinions on this please?

I would return it and get the new one. If you find yourself locked out of some particular software feature in the future because of some obscure capability that was introduced with this current generation then you'll be kicking yourself.

I would say that paying for 1080p video on 27 inches and paying for high-bitrate, multi channel audio through stereo computer speakers, is throwing your money away. If you want home theater experience, invest the money into a home theater. Otherwise, accept the fact that computers are to HD video as Kia's are to motoring!

I don't understand your point. Do you mean that these compressed crap on iTunes stores are a waste of money ? Then we agree. I don't think Apple should sell them for 20 bucks when one could buy a Bu-ray movie well below 15 bucks these days. However, Apple is playing smart here by depriving users like me the opportunity to buy and play Blu-ray content on my MB and instead forcing me to buy that compressed crap on iTunes store. Of course I can play Blu-ray on my home theater and enjoy it, but if I can also play it on my Mac, it would a great utility. Besides I don't agree with your point that Apple cinema display and iMac are not good for playing Blu-ray. They are good enough and they should be complimented with the ability to play Blu-ray.

These are nice updates. Sad not to see bluray as Steve'o wants to steer everyone to downloads. eSATA would be nice too as others mentioned. I'm surprised Apple isn't leading on USB3.0 but I would suspect they are trying to keep margins as high as possbile until USB3.0 becomes cheaper. That or they have too much supply of USB2.0 components. Or simply, OSX does not support USB 3.0 yet.

As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.

Any opinions on this please?

Personally, I would take it back in and see if they will waive the restocking fee due to the new product release. If they don't waive the restocking fee, I'd probably still pay the penalty. Bear in mind that the processor upgrade also provides a pretty substantial memory performance upgrade not just in faster memory, but the integrated memory controller on the i3 gives you yet another memory performance boost. I think it would be worth the $110 or so that it would cost you.

I would return it and get the new one. If you find yourself locked out of some particular software feature in the future because of some obscure capability that was introduced with this current generation then you'll be kicking yourself.

I agree, even if you have to pay for restocking, getting a newer faster machine is better in the long run.

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation? Aside from the processor upgrade and the graphical update, it seems like an irrelevant refresh.

Any opinions on this please?

Ouch - that hurts. Let me comfort you by saying that every time I buy a new Mac it seems to be outdated and obsolete within a couple of months. In your case, though, Id check it out and return if the cost is acceptable.

But having said that - every time I buy a computer I pour over the specs, by my own Ram etc etc. The net result is always that the money I save I could have doubled by not obsessing and doing 'real' work instead. And the other more important thing is that I usually end up buying the lower spec'ed machine but when I turn it on I am happy as hell and it seems to be plenty fast. My alu MacBook (not pro) is 'old' now but it is still sweet and happy and zipping along.

Quote:

Originally Posted by christopher126

Quick question: My daughter just got a MacBookPro but is still using an old non 'n' airport express.

If I get her a new Express, would she see a noticeable difference in speed when online?

The speed of the airport express is better than she'll ever get on the web anyway so it shouldn't make much of a difference. I am not sure if there is 'lag' involved with either g or n protocols / hardware. The advantage of n over g as far as I understand is just for networking activities (within you home)

Sad to see the almost certain death of matte, I really hate to whine, but...in any case let's see if these have better anti reflective coatings, though I very much doubt it, sad ro see such beautiful machines which to many of us are a glare hell.

The speed of the airport express is better than she'll ever get on the web anyway so it shouldn't make much of a difference. I am not sure if there is 'lag' involved with either g or n protocols / hardware. The advantage of n over g as far as I understand is just for networking activities (within you home)

It seems pretty clear that they went 5750 to save nearly 20W in the thermal profile. It's a decent step up from the previous iMac and you are never going to see the highest end gpu or CPU in an iMac or a laptop. The 5750 delivers 90% of 5770's performance at <85% of it's power profile and is a good tradeoff..

Well given that the 5770 is a rather low end part, especially for the 27" iMacs resolution, I wouldn't call it a good trade off.

The 5750 has less memory bandwidth than the 4850. With the same amount of memory, they will go back in forth on which is better in benchmarks. I would hardly call it a true upgrade to the 4850. More like a replacement that uses less power.

The real problem in the iMac is a design that forces Apple to use underpowered hardware given the native resolution of the iMac's display. Of course, nobody was expecting a redesign of the iMac at this time and even if they did make a change it would probably be just to make it .125 of an inch thinner.

Of course the real let down in the iMac line is no USB 3.0. As another person mentioned, the iMac at one time was know for having class leading hardware. This refresh could have been announced 4 months ago.

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

As the title says, 11 days ago (unaware of the refresh) I purchased the low end previous generation iMac (3.06gHz core 2 duo, 4gb ram, geforce 9400). It appears to me that apple charges a 10% restocking fee if a computer is returned within 14 days of the purchase date (please let me know if this is incorrect). Is it worth my money to return the previous generation in order to get the refreshed intel i3 generation?

It's worth it to get a new one and NOT pay the 10% restocking.
You should contact Apple and explain you wqould have waited had you known the new one was coming out and that they should waive the 10% restocking fee (which can easlily be done by the local manager or at the online store).
You need to call or go to the store where you purchased it, ASAP.

If you have been an Apple customer with previous computer purchases, point that out. Be polite but firm that you would like this new computer but don't want to pay 10% for the privilege.

It's not about ruining Apples day, it's about leaving feedback. If you want something you should let Apple know, and while you may not care about their potential lost profits I'm sure they do. If apple receives enough complaints they will eventually take notice.

Even with VAT added, it's not even close - another Apple European rip off.

I wonder if they have the gall to put prices up when VAT goes up to 20% in January. Why am I even speculating of course they will - getting really tired of European customers subsidising cheaper US prices.

I'm sure the last time I was outraged at some exorbitant Euro/US price difference there was a whiff of something official statement claiming that there's extra costs associated with infrastructure or some such. Such as what? US computer company, made in China - I'm sure they're just as costly to get to any part of the globe and in any case suck it up - you're a global business.

Surprised at no USB3 as well. Given USB and FW, what would eSATA get you?

External drive connection faster than USB2 and FW800.

Quote:

Originally Posted by malax

Why would I need USB 3 and eSATA exactly? What might I be hooking up to this that would benefit from those interfaces (that Firewire 800 and USB 2 don't already deliver)? It's an honest question. Are those "omissions" a big deal?

USB2 and FW800 aren't fast enough to keep up with the faster hard drives that are shipping these days (even more so with SSD). esata (and the newer USB and FW speeds) gives you a connection to the hard drive that's just as fast as having an internal drive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wiggin

And what, exactly, are you going to connect to eSATA? Is it faster than FW800? Sure. But other than a fast RAID, which is still fairly uncommon for consumers to own, what peripheral are you going to connect that will take advantage of eSATA's speed? You might get a slight benefit if you have a very fast single external drive, but not enough to justify adding that new port.

Very fast single external drive. Additional benefit if it had multiple discrete esata busses. And I disagree that the benefit isn't worth it, it's an easy port to support considering they already have the internal sata.